Comment Number: OL-10508848
Received: 3/15/2005 11:08:26 AM
Subject: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment
Title: National Security Personnel System
CFR Citation: 5 CFR Chapter XCIX and Part 9901
No Attachments

Comments:

Hi, I would like to address this comment to the PAY BANDING which appears to be the new in vogue way of doing things. In my opinion, the underlying factors determining a raise in pay never really change. That is, an individual's performance. The step increases existed to keep people employed within the government, which was for many years paid less (or a lot less!) than our private enterprise counterparts. Our step increases helped us to (almost) keep up with inflation system. But performance WAS rewarded by giving promotions. Still, after all this, the pay was still considerably less than our private enterprise counterparts. There was loyalty to serve our government. But there was another important reason for the small increases... the government does not work as private industry and make profits to reward people. The government has a limited pot, if you will, of money. The government is a budget-oriented structure, not a profit oriented structure. And the nature of all of this is what put the original step increase system in place (just as step increases existed. but so did tax increases. keeping everything in check). In my opinion, the simple truth is that paying someone much higher for performance cannot exist within a limited, highly constrained budget (not profit) oriented government structure unless someone else is paid much less, or let go. And what happens when the budgets are cut becomes an even more debateable question that it is now! There are many intelligent, highly qualified people working in government service who DO NOT need a money flag waved in front of them to stay. They stay because they believe in our government and the system. Money is not their main priority. A pay for performance system will do exactly the same as it has done in private industry. Money will lure qualified people into the government system who have one thing on their mind. Money. But it WILL NOT keep them. These people will be coming to the government for money. READ MY WORDS: Loyalty is NOT their main priority, money is. So they will come, take what they can, and then leave for a better deal. So much for retaining good help! No system is perfect but the pay banding system, while highly questionable as far as WHO gets the better performance ratings for higher pay (no comments necessary here)) , does not belong in a system in which the federal employees serve the government because they believe in our government, not in the power of the almighty dollar. I see this as a step leading to corruption in our government and would scrutinize the motives of the proponents who decided this system could work within our budget-oriented structure in the first place. When we talk about competing or learning from private industry, we must not be so naive as to ignore the many, MANY scandals we see in the news everyday that occur within these privatized systems. Do these proponents of the new way somehow think that the government will be immune to such corruption? Have they really thought this one out? Is this a quick band-aid fix? How long will this last until they decide to .. errr....fix the system again? I leave these answers to you to decide. Thanks for reading my comment. Kristen Bruno